Socionics is built around a theoretical structure and is pretty unrelated to empiricism except insofar as each individual sees it for themselves, but everybody sees it differently lol. It's more of a Ti thing.Originally Posted by Bertrand
Socionics is built around a theoretical structure and is pretty unrelated to empiricism except insofar as each individual sees it for themselves, but everybody sees it differently lol. It's more of a Ti thing.
he never said it wasnt mate.
I see it that way:
Ti is about defining a theory
Te is about applying a theory
@Bertrand I'm supposing that even before empiricism was formalized as a concept there was still some general sense of operating under parameters that were generally observable and demonstrable. a single individual can find that it "works" to howl at the moon every third Wednesday for good luck, and try to bring others around to applying this practice because they find it useful, but unless they could show their work, so to speak, I'm hard pressed to consider this Te.
When reading about your Enneagram type does not make you a little bit uncomfortable, or doesn't irk or annoy you a little at least in the beginning, it is probably not the right one.
Reading about the flaws of your Enneagram type should really hit a soft spot in you. You should go "Ouch, yeah, that is me, ugh." It needs to sting a little. It needs to frustrate you a little (or a lot).
Whenever someone speaks too freely and casually about their Enneagram type, it is rather obvious it is most likely not their actual type, but just a wing, a fix, or neither.
from jung:
Extraverted thinking, therefore, need not necessarily be a merely concretistic thinking it may equally well be a purely ideal thinking, if, for instance, it can be shown that the ideas with which it is engaged are to a great extent borrowed from without, i.e. are transmitted by tradition and education. The criterion of judgment, therefore, as to whether or not a thinking is extraverted, hangs directly upon the question: by [p. 429] which standard is its judgment governed -- is it furnished from without, or is its origin subjective? A further criterion is afforded by the direction of the thinker's conclusion, namely, whether or not the thinking has a preferential direction outwards. It is no proof of its extraverted nature that it is preoccupied with concrete objects, since I may be engaging my thoughts with a concrete object, either because I am abstracting my thought from it or because I am concretizing my thought with it. Even if I engage my thinking with concrete things, and to that extent could be described as extraverted, it yet remains both questionable and characteristic as regards the direction my thinking will take; namely, whether in its further course it leads back again to objective data, external facts, and generally accepted ideas, or not. So far as the practical thinking of the merchant, the engineer, or the natural science pioneer is concerned, the objective direction is at once manifest. But in the case of a philosopher it is open to doubt, whenever the course of his thinking is directed towards ideas. In such a case, before deciding, we must further enquire whether these ideas are mere abstractions from objective experience, in which case they would merely represent higher collective concepts, comprising a sum of objective facts ; or whether (if they are clearly not abstractions from immediate experience) they may not be derived from tradition or borrowed from the intellectual atmosphere of the time. In the latter event, such ideas must also belong to the category of objective data, in which case this thinking should also be called extraverted.
so during that time period, a Te type who found it useful to howl at the moon might have been better able to substantiate their theories using external bodies of information.
did you miss the point on purpose so you could share ur knowledge of ancient history, or what?
I won't contradict you in this case, Bertrand.
My point is about using scientific methods, otherwise all we do is just educated guessing. Personally I'm comfortable with that.
When a chick is obsessed with horses, there's a very high chance she is Gamma SF, especially SEE.
Lmao
Ok then
I still think Winnie is right, even if some Te types find value in it.
I don't insist on being right, but I think it is a good idea to put this up for debate.
I feel like I'd just be repeating myself to go into this, suffice to say socionics is founded primarily on an intuition that seeks to link logic and ethics and is not given form primarily by Ti nor Te, but rather rationality, with types of all kinds contributing to it accordingly by their preference, treating it in kind, and appreciating it (ethics included, i.e.: strat). to say its one or the other is to project and privilege ones own preferred understanding, and in some ways miss the point, treat it like some kind of simple sets of if-then formulas where they can plug people in and derive set results which is a very superficial understanding and precisely what people in this very thread criticize olimpia for (i.e. an over simplification)
When IEI decides something sample size is usually 1<n<5.
MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
Winning is for losers
Sincerely yours,
idiosyncratic type
Life is a joke but do you have a life?
Joinif you dare https://matrix.to/#/#The16Types:matrix.org
"New Age" (spirituality) people are mostly IEI, ESI, or SEE and So blindspot (particularly Sx/Sp) and 6+9 fix.
Have fun distinguishing which is which.
Astrology affects and is loved by a similar crowd. Just add some Beta STs and INTx individuals to the mix.
Least likely type to believe in any of this: LSE Sp/So.
Also ESE are very into that new age stuff.
here is one: if sisofnight types something, certainly she will never change her mind.
CETERUM AUTEM CENSEO WASHINGTON D.C. ESSE DELENDAM
When I type with certainty, then yeah. When I don't settle on a type or I am unsure about a typing, then I surely can change my mind. I tend to change my mind more when it comes to Enneagram and Ni leads, especially ILIs, because I do not have a lot of experience with those types irl.
it's ok to admit you are wrong sometimes (emphasis sometimes) oli
CETERUM AUTEM CENSEO WASHINGTON D.C. ESSE DELENDAM
on a more serious note, astrology affects everyone, those who love it are those who understand this. it can involve all the functions, i personally got into it because of empiricism lol, because all my buddies were of the same sign, it worked for me, and i could see it working outside of me. quite Te eh?
I was so glad from the last recent discoveries in sciences because they say the same thing, they confirm these differences... is this still Ni now?
Te polr criticizing Te polr for not understanding Te bcuz Te polr. meta
Imago determines what you are the most attracted to, but your Dual is the kind of person you unconsciously expect in the ideal scenario.
First, you fall for someone. Then, you'll unconsciously expect them to act like your Dual (or at least like yourself, aka an Identical).
The ensuing power struggle will revolve around how much or well your partner can live up to your unconscious expectation.
Of course the "better" the ITR and the closer to your Dual (or Identical) your partner is, the less intense those power struggles will be.
And then there are power struggles beyond Socionics, like gender role related ones.
For lonely SX first (sometimes even second) individuals, a belief in God can give them the impression they are part of some magical, forever enduring union with someone.
Aka "I am in a relationship with Jesus".
No, the types are not evenly distributed.
Socionists just want an idealized world where everyone has an "equal chance" of ending up with their Dual. Confirmation bias.
Loneliness isn't required, but yes. An attachment to or yearning for an ideal, even an ideal self can also be sx - the spiritual communion with greater/higher energy. Whereas actual sex, the physical communion can easily be sp - as it is satisfying the urges of the physical body, or even so - in the forming a bond with one another. The body physical - sp, the body's energy/frequency - sx, the body collective - so. imo.
Not even Gulenko is married to his Dual.
Duality is not common nor necessary, yo.
All those "studies" (cough) who claim Duality is the most common relation amongst couples are bs.
I find typology awfully convenient for those that like to push their subjective views on others or refuse to accept reality as it is. Many seem to want unquestioned acceptance of theories whether or not there is evidence for them. "You ask for evidence? I don't have to. I prefer 'Ti' so it just has to make sense to MeMeMe." Or, the real kicker, "I prefer intuition, so unlike you I don't build My worldview from stupid sensory data man, so I don't need 'evidence'. I am so Deeeeeepah." This is the impression typology gives. Maybe knowlege of reality require both te and Ti to make sense of the world.
The scientific worldview is intuitive as well as rational and empirical. It doesn't follow that just because one argues from a particular philosophical tradition that they are cognitively biased. All perspectives cannot be equally valid or true. This is false eqivalency. Some are closer to the truth than others.
I'm too lazy.Maybe you should start your own thread on the subject.
found this accurate somehow. I just accept the theoretical stuff that worked out irl so far while leaving potential deviations from what I know open because every system will fail at some point. The other stuff I keep in the back of my head and still look out for evidence.. and I say this as a Te POLR. To me this whole thing only matters if I can use it irl or if it works irl.. otherwise this stuff would be pretty much meaningless to me.
yeah Te is just the flipside to Fi, so if doing x makes you feel better there is some small Te component to it, this demonstrable proof aspect to it is more about Se imo
if taking any action that works for you or makes you feel good is Te, then everybody is Te and the concept of Te becomes useless as a descriptor.
Just like Fi! Everyone had subjective values and ethic. NTs value logic, therefore Fi!
When you deal with duals/semi-duals/activators having romance interest to you - there are low chances to resist their feelings without return ones, except when your heart is occupied already. Take this into account and don't meet them IRL if you prefer to avoid relations with them. By the self-induced phenomena the feelings of both will rise soon to the degree when both will loose their heads.
The interesting scenario appears when you get several such challengers for your heart. Any choice will be good and bad there.
The foolest idea is to organise the meeting with other Socionics fans with taking part in it of your romance pair befor you got liabilities between you. Types and good IR may be understood there quickly what may promote the mentioned situation.
@WinnnieW, at some point Mr Nardi describes INTPs (TiNe) brain reaction to shame: if any other type get slightly triggered in the shame neocortex region of the brain, for little occurrences, an INTP instead lacks those low shame signals, resulting in his avoidment/non comprehension of social etiquette; but it's not that this region of the brain never alights, in fact when the INTP is triggered by a situation that is particularly shameful, for him, the shame response in the brain will not only alight but expand like domino, resulting in an INTP that gets tomato red and can't talk anymore.
Is this related to low Fe (reception of outside dynamics) and Se polr (bad control of stimuli)?
this can show that not necessarily what we overreact to is the side of us more developed, it's usually the least developed the most troublesome. my 2 cents summary of the Psycho types...
min. 17
am I taking crazy pills or is that not saying anything at all. the definition of certainty is not susceptible to changing mind, and the definition of unsettled is the possibility of changing
Can you give us some legit typing guidelines for food. All I've got so far is chicken pot pies = Ne.
Reply With Quote
